The Freedom of Knowledge, The Power of Thought ©
Current News | Introduction | Colloidal Silver | Chemtrails | Sylphs | Emerging Diseases | Forbidden Cures | Ozone | Immunity Boosting | Nutrition | Tone Gen
From Ken Adachi, Editor Facebook Censorship California: Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes bill easing permits on cell phone towershttp://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/16/california-gov-jerry-brown-vetoes-bill-easing-permits-on-cell-phone-towers/ Gov. Jerry Brown late Sunday vetoed Senate Bill 649, which proposed to scale back local government permit processes for antennas and equipment for wireless services. Gov. Jerry Brown late Sunday vetoed a bill backed by the cell phone industry that would have made it easier to install microwave radiation antennas. Senate Bill 649, authored by Sen. Ben Hueso, D-San Diego and co-authored by Assemblyman Bill Quirk, D-Hayward, proposed to scale back the permitting process for antennas and other equipment in an effort to meet demand for wireless services. In a signing statement, Brown wrote that while he saw the value in “extending this innovative technology rapidly and efficiently,” the bill took too much control away from cities and counties. The bill was primarily supported by the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the main trade group for the U.S. wireless telecommunications industry. The group said SB 649 would help boost the economy. Yet the bill had alarmed many local government officials around the state. They worried if SB 649 became law, it would cap how much they could charge phone companies for leases to $250 a year. Others raised concerns about the risk to public health from cell towers. Grass-roots activists and scientists said that if SB 649 became law, a projected 50,000 new cellular antennas would be installed on public buildings and utility poles in California neighborhoods, creating a risk to public health because of the dangers of radiation and electromagnetic frequencies emitted by cell towers. “I am thrilled that Governor Brown showed strength and stood up to this powerful wireless industry and said no — you are not going to do this in my state!” Ellen Marks, a San Francisco-based leader of the California Alliance for Safer Technology, wrote in an email after Brown’s decision was posted online. “This is a tremendous victory for democracy,” said Marks, whose group is trying to keep cellular antennas away from homes, schools, offices and parks. An industry spokeswoman said the bill maintained local authority for “small cell” antennas, particularly in historical or coastal areas, and that governments could recover capital and administrative costs. San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo was among several Bay Area leaders who voiced their opposition to the bill. Quirk and Hueso called the health concerns overblown, saying the cell towers are safe. Joel Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health, was heartened by Brown’s veto, coming on the heels of a federal appeals court ruling last week that supports Berkeley’s landmark cell phone “right to know” ordinance. The city law, which took effect in 2016, requires retailers to warn cellphone customers that wearing their device next to the body could result in exposure to radio frequency radiation exceeding federal guidelines. Cellphone retailers must either post the message or provide a paper copy to anyone who buys or leases phones. “The Governor’s veto of SB 649 protects Californians from exposure to millimeter radiation from as many as 50,000 new cell towers,” Moskowitz wrote in an email Sunday night. He noted that more than 180 scientists and doctors have signed a declaration calling for a moratorium on the increase of cell antennas required for 5G deployment, “as we are concerned about the health effects including neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer.” Jerry Bronw's message followoing Veto of SB649https://www.gov.ca.gov/docs/Sb_649_Veto_Message_2017.pdf OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR Sincerely, [signed: Edmund G. Brown] Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown Vetoes Cellphone Tower BillMon., Oct. 16, 2017http://www.odwyerpr.com/story/public/9567/2017-10-16/calif-gov-jerry-brown-vetoes-cellphone-tower-bill.html By Jack O'DwyerCalif. Gov. Jerry Brown yesterday, after about a month’s wait, vetoed Senate Bill 649 that would have removed local control over cellphone tower creation. It would have created a state mandated system of cell towers every couple of hundred feet apart in California, said opponents. Opposing it were 300 cities, 47 counties and more than 100 community, planning, health, environment and justice organizations.
EMF Safety Network and Ecological Options Network opposed SB 649 since the bill was introduced in March because it said cell towers emit harmful radiation. The bill would have allowed unlimited refrigerator-size cell equipment on utility poles, streetlights, sidewalks, in parks, on schools and public buildings with no safety oversight. Sandi Maurer, Director of EMF Safety Network said, “We mailed Governor Brown a couple thousand postcards depicting SB 649 as a slobbering warty monster wielding a zapping cell tower and asked him to veto SB 649. We are thrilled and relieved Governor Brown vetoed this bill.” Mary Beth Brangan co-director of EON said, “Now we need to prepare ourselves for the next state and federal telecom push, where they will try again with bills to overtake local authority and disregard public health.” Gov. Brown said local communities should have a say in placement of any such towers. Cellular Industry Backed Bill The bill was primarily supported by the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the main trade group for the U.S. wireless telecommunications industry. The group said SB 649 would help boost the economy. Yet the bill had alarmed many local government officials around the state. They worried if SB 649 became law, it would cap how much they could charge phone companies for leases to $250 a year. Activists, meanwhile, were concerned about the risk to public health from cell towers. “I am thrilled that Governor Brown showed strength and stood up to this powerful wireless industry and said no — you are not going to do this in my state!” Ellen Marks, a San Francisco-based leader of the California Alliance for Safer Technology, wrote in an email after Brown’s decision was posted online. “This is a tremendous victory for democracy,” said Marks, whose group is trying to keep cellular antennas away from homes, schools, offices and parks. A CTIA spokeswoman said the bill maintained local authority for “small cell” antennas, particularly in historical or coastal areas, and that governments could recover capital and administrative costs. But San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo was among several Bay Area leaders who voiced their opposition to the bill, and he did so again in an Oct. 3 opinion piece published in the New York Times. Local Authority Would Have Been Overridden In it, Liccardo argued that if enacted into law, SB 649 would override local authority to set lease rates, supplant local jurisdiction rights to decide how to deploy telecommunications equipment over public areas, and wouldn’t require those companies to expand broadband access to low-income neighborhoods. Grass-roots activists and scientists said that if SB 649 became law, a projected 50,000 new cellular antennas would be installed on public buildings and utility poles in California neighborhoods, creating a risk to public health because of the dangers of radiation and electromagnetic frequencies emitted by cell towers. Quirk and Hueso called that criticism by scientists of their legislation overblown, saying the cell towers are safe. Yet repeated calls this summer by the Bay Area News Group to the Washington, D.C.-based CTIA seeking comment on potential health concerns related to cellular antennas were never returned by any spokesperson. At the time, Joel Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health, told the Bay Area New Group that the trade group habitually ducks publicly addressing the health risks of cell antennas. Moskowitz Heartened by Veto The CTIA “never says it’s safe because the industry will be in deep water when the lawsuits play out finally before a jury,’’ said Moskowitz, who has studied and written about the issue for eight years. In an email to the Bay Area News Group late Sunday, Moskowitz was heartened by Brown’s veto, coming on the heels of a federal appeals court ruling last week that supports Berkeley’s landmark cell phone “right to know” ordinance. The city law, which took effect last year, requires retailers to warn cellphone customers that wearing their device next to the body could result in exposure to radio frequency radiation exceeding federal guidelines. Cellphone retailers must either post the message or give a paper copy to people who buy or lease phones. “The Governor’s veto of SB 649 protects Californians from exposure to millimeter radiation from as many as 50,000 new cell towers,” wrote Moskowitz. He noted that more than 180 scientists and doctors have signed a declaration calling for a moratorium on the increase of cell antennas required for 5G deployment, “as we are concerned about the health effects including neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer.” Related Calif. SB-649 Will Fast Track Approve 5G Small Cell Antennas EVERYWHERE in California - April 3 Deadline to Comment (April 1, 2017 SB 649 Would Steamroll Local Government's Ability to Regulate the Placement of 5G Wireless Infrastructure in YOUR Neighborhood (April 3, 2017)
Dr Strangelove is Back: FCC Chair Tom Wheeler and the 'National Priority' Push for 5G (July 13, 2016) Cell Phones And Wireless Dangers - The Fundamentals (Oct 7, 2007) Scientific Papers Show Adverse Biological Effects + Damage to Health from Wi-Fi (Oct. 31, 2013) Microwaves: The Radiation Poisoning of America (Oct. 8, 2007) Why Do Millions of People Continue to Use Smart Phones & WiFi Devices When the Health Damaging Effects Are So Well Known? (March 27, 2015) WiFi Dangers, Index of Articles Wireless Radiation Hazards Papers by Gary Vesperman The 2nd book Possible Hazards of Cell Phones and Towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, and Wireless Computers, Printers, Laptops, Mice, Keyboards, and Routers, Book 2 (Rev. 8/17/16 and Rec. 8/10/16) (*.pdf file)
Gary Vesperman's Second Book regarding the hazards and health effects of these toxic devices. 190 Pages. The 3rd book Possible Hazards of Cell Phones and Towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, and Wireless Computers, Printers, Laptops, Mice, Keyboards, and Routers - Book Three (Rec. 9/17/16) (*.pdf file) Gary Vesperman's Third Book regarding the hazards and health effects of these toxic devices. 227 Pages. The 4th book Possible Hazards of Cell Phones and Towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, and Wireless Computers, Printers, Laptops, Mice, Keyboards, and Routers - Book Four (Rec. 12/13/16) (*.pdf file) The 5th book Possible Hazards of Cell Phones and Towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, and Wireless Computers, Printers, Laptops, Mice, Keyboards, and Routers - Book Five (Rec. 12/21/16) (*.pdf file) Smart Water Meter Hazards (Rec. 8.18.16) (*.pdf file) Wireless Radiation Hazards Politics
FCC comment re discontinuing wireline telephone service Docket 16-399 (Rec. 12.13.16) (Rec. 12.13.16) (*.pdf file) Angela Tisang July 11, 2016, Letter to FCC and House Subcommittee on Communication and Technology (Rec. 7.15.16) (*.pdf file) ABC Censors Catalyst Wifi Report, Suspends Reporter, and Embarrasses Itself, July 7, 2016 by Global Freedom Movement (Rec. 7.10.16) Barrie Trower “The Cooking of Humanity ” Microwaves, Smart Meters and the use of electronics for “mind control” *UPDATED* (Rec. 7.10.16) Wireless Electromagnetic Radiation may Cause Cancer, Genetic Deformities, 80 Immune System Disorders and Kill Animals and Plants
The Health Argument against Cell Phones and Cell Towers (Rec. 8.18.16) (*.pdf file) Radiofrequency radiation at Stockholm Central Railway Station in Sweden and some medical aspects on public exposure to RF fields (Rec. 8.18.16) (*.pdf file) Mircrowave Communmications; Base-station emissions and heath concerns (Rec. 8.14.16) (*.pdf file) "Do You Have Microwave/EMR Sickness? Your Cell Phone (i.e. Electromagnetic Weapon) May –Insidiously – Be Making Us Sick! By Paul Raymond Doyon. (Rec. 7.5.16) (*.pdf file)" The paper "Are The Microwaves Killing the Insects, Frogs, and Birds? And Are We Next?", By Paul Raymond Doyon, Feb. 18, 2008 (Rec. 7/3/16) (*.pdf file) EMR Updates: The Microwave Factor - The Newsletter of EMF Refugee, The International Coalition for an Electromagnetic Safe Planet (IC-ESP) (Rec. 7.10.16) THE EFFECT OF MICROWAVESON THE CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM, M. Bergman (Translated from the German for Ford Motor ACompany) copyright 1965 (78 pages) (Rec. 7.10.16)(*.pdf file) Electromagnetic fields: High-level microwave technology concerns (Rec. 6.24.16) (*.pdf file)" "The Possible Role of Contact Current in Cancer Risk Associated With Residential Magnetic Fields (Rec. 6.24.16) (*.pdf file)" Limits of Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Energy in the Frequency Range from 3 kHz to 300 GHz Safety Code 6 Press Conference Ottawa Canada (Rec. 9.16.16) (*.pdf file)" Electromagnetic Field Issues & Mitigation Solutions - Presentation to the Ontario Association of Home Inspectors (Rec. 9.16.16) (*.pdf file)" *** Wireless Radiation Hazards Reports from Germany Trees in Bamberg and Hallstadt in the radiation field of 65 mobile phone base stations (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Health Implications of Long-term Exposure to Electrosmog (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (1999/519/EC) (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) BEES, BIRDS AND MANKIND Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog’ (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) HOW SUSCEPTIBLE ARE GENES TO MOBILE PHONE RADIATION? (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Radiation Protection in Conflict with Science - A Documentation (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Report from the Science & Wireless 2015 prepared for the Pandora Foundation and for the Kompetenzinitiative (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) REPORT from the BioEM2015 The Annual Meeting of BEMS & EBEA held in Asilomar, CA, USA on June 15 - 19, 2015 (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Brain Tumour Risk Associated with Use of Mobile and Cordless Phones (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Are Children at Increased Risk of Health Effects from Exposure to Radiation from Mobile Communication Devices? (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) How Industry and Politics Has Been Dealing with the Radiation Protection of People - A historical review (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Wi-Fi adversely affects our Health (*.pdf file) (Rec. 9/9/16) ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY & HUMAN RIGHTS - COMMENTARY TO THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Report on a U.S. Senate Hearing in Washington D.C. on September 14, 2009 (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) Abstract (German "burnout syndrome" could be due to EMF below the legal limits) (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file) ICNIRP GUIDELINES FOR LIMITING EXPOSURE TO TIME ‐ VARYING ELECTRIC, MAGNETIC AND ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS (UP TO 300 GHZ) (Rec. 9/9/16) (*.pdf file)
|
|||||||
|
|
[Editor's Note: Gov. Jerry Brown would have signed this bill into law if he hadn't been inundated with telephone calls, faxes, emails, letters, postcards, Tweets, and direct lobbying efforts by citizens and organized science groups who urged him to veto the bill. The fact that he waited until the very last hour of the very last day to veto this bill tells you he was in a quandary whether to let the bill slide into law or veto it before midnight of Oct. 15, 2017. I'm greatly relieved he made the right decision, but his glowing appraisal of 5G technology, without any mention of its devastating health effects (as part of his reason for vetoing the bill) in his explanation to the legislature following the veto, tells you he's still under the mighty sway ($$) of the Big Boys of Telecommunication. You can be sure they will come back again and not simply go away. And that's where YOU come in. The California Legislature sellouts, beginning with committee chairman Sen. Ben Hueso (right), who accepted the "re-election donation"graft from the telecommunications industry and sponsored SB649 need to be driven from office; ideally via a recall election and send these political cretins a message that selling out the health and well being of California citizens and especially her children, to further enrich themselves and the Telecom giants is not going to be tolerated any longer....Ken Adachi]